A Grammar of Games

Lots of my thoughts of late have drifted to the idea of a grammar of games. A grammar of games encompasses both the technical choices available and the aesthetic concerns surrounding those choices. Actors like to talk about choices. When something happens, someone has made a choice. Everything has a justification, even if it's not immediately apparent.

The same holds true for videogames.

The camera in Starcraft is an incredibly important component not just in the way the game plays, but in the way it feels. It is disconnected from the minutiae, a godlike view, and so it makes it much easier to see each unit as a piece on a chessboard, not a real person. One can commit to risky attacks because they don't see the units as precious. Think of Ender's Game.

A grammar of games provides the 'how,' the technical considerations that go into creating a game, and it also considers the 'why,' the justification for each of those decisions. It should also take into account the 'what,' the details that inform the general theme or attitude of the game.

Borderlands 3 is a game with a very limited vocabulary: Loot and Shoot. Or Shoot and Loot. Either order. Yet it has a very specific aesthetic, both visually and thematically. Visually it evokes comic books, cartoons, violence unbridled. Thematically it is an amalgamation of internet memes and action movie cliches and subversions of those cliches.

A grammar of games asks, "to what purpose," and, "does it feed back into itself?"

Feedback is the heart of gaming. Putting something into a system and receiving an alteration back. Starcraft provides immediate feedback when encountering other units. They fight. You have the ability to alter their fight characteristics. Timing and split-second tactics determine who wins. Every altercation is unique. Each arises from a fixed set of choices.

Borderlands 3 constantly reaffirms its purpose over and over again: shoot everything, loot everything. Those are the primary verbs, and they work quite well when wrapped in the proper coating. Visually and thematically the player navigates a hyper-reality. The cartoony nature allows the player to get up close and personal without feeling too bad, and to continue shooting everything until it stops moving.

A grammar of games requires the input of people who make games, examining what they do and providing a justification for their choices. It marries the technical side with the creative. It asks what effects arise from each decision.

It's about examining the meaning of the game as something meaningful. That's the basic assumption. A game is meaningful. Given that, what meanings can we extrapolate from the visuals, the soundtrack, the feedback, the different parts of the game when compared with other parts or to the whole?

I'm not sure exactly what this would look like. It goes beyond a single critical paper, into the realm of common terminology that can be reused and refined.